On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 07:21:40PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > The existing state of affairs is that a superuser who really needs to drop > a temp schema can do so, if she's careful that it's not active. Pinning > things would break that, or at least add an additional roadblock. If it's > some sort of virtual pin rather than a regular pg_depend entry, then it > *would* be impossible to get around (mumble ... DELETE FROM pg_namespace > ... mumble). As against that, what problem are we fixing by preventing > superusers from doing that? A careless superuser can screw things up > arbitrarily badly in any case, so I'm not that fussed about the hazard > that the namespace isn't idle.
And when you try to do chirugy on a corrupted cluster, it can be on the contrary very useful to be able to work with objects and manipulate them more freely as a superuser. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
